Items tagged discipline

Dever on Church Membership and Discipline

Sat, 01 Mar 2008 06:16:51 GMT

Andy Naselli has some audio and video of Mark Dever speaking on church membership and discipline at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School.

Godliness Through Discipline

Thu, 24 May 2007 21:20:11 GMT

“But refuse profane and old wives’ fables, and exercise thyself rather unto godliness” ~ I Tim. 4:7

Discipline is the key to godliness. It is the means by which we obtain holy and righteous living and is mandated for all Christian people. We do not become godly all at once. True godliness takes effort and is not instantanious. Godliness has a price. Christ tells His followers to “count the cost” of following Him. You must be willing to pay it. The apostle Paul continually spoke of beating his body into submisson of obedience to God’s Word. Our natural inclinations will be to flee from God and His demands over our life. Yet godly discipline is not an option for the Christian. The Lord commands it. It is a goal to be labored and struggled for. We are to be continually orienting ourselves towards godliness for godliness.

Godliness has no shortcuts. We must gain control over our hearts and minds for Christ’s sake. Our minds must be trained to think in biblical categories. The heart must be the center of a righteous attitude seeking to please God. Christians cannot be controlled by their fleeting emotions and own sinful desires. Rather we must deny ourselves, take up our cross, and conduct ourselves as the living sacrifices we’re called to be. How can this be done? Through the realization the Holy Spirit is working in and through you to bring about godliness. The Holy Spirit is working to produce love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, meekness and self-control. These to not come easy. Godliness only comes through discipline.

The Keys to the Expansive Kingdom

Wed, 11 Apr 2007 15:10:09 GMT

Several comments have registered discomfort with my (and the WCF’s) narrow construction of the kingdom of Christ. Some in fact have argued that the kingdom extends beyond the church.

I wonder if those who make such claims have considered what this view does to the doctrine of the keys to the kingdom. That doctrine is not explicitly taught in the Westminster Standards but it does come in the confessional tradition from which Kuyperianism sprung. And it takes seriously Christ’s teaching in Mt. 16 and 18 and John 20 that he gave his apostles the keys to the kingdom to forgive sins, to open up the gates of heaven, and to close those gates to those who will not believe and repent.

So if the church has the keys of the kingdom (namely, preaching and discipline according to the Heidelberg Catechism), then why aren’t ministers allowed to hold the keys to the expansive kingdom? Church officers would seem to have some responsibility and authority regarding the kingdom of Christ according to Christ’s own words. But now when the kingdom expands to politics, medicine or aerobics, suddenly those keys don’t work.

What gives?

God’s Word on Spanking (Part 2 of 3)

Thu, 05 Apr 2007 05:35:07 GMT

(By Ralph Drollinger)

3. THE CAUTIONS IN SPANKING

Parents (and only the parents of a child) are to spank when there is clear-cut rebellion to authority. Again, it is a measured, careful, timely and controlled act of love toward the child who has distanced himself or herself by insubordinate actions.

The best way to think of this is as a rescue mission. As a parent, you are on a mission to redeem your child from foolishness. Since God has commanded your children to obey you (Eph. 6:1), it is not an act of kindness to allow them to get away with rebellion. To do so is a severe disservice to your kids and undercuts your parental headship in the institution of the family.

As was stated previously, it is akin (in the institution of government) to the police force becoming passive on crime, or the elders in the church turning their eyes away from evil. There is no difference in principle. Your God-given authority (in any institution) will deteriorate if you fail to act as a loving, authoritative, disciplinarian.

Having said that, there are at least four ways in which spanking can be performed incorrectly. They are:

A. SPANKING WITH ANGER

James 1:20 says, “For the anger of man does not achieve the righteousness of God.” The biblical injunction to spank does not mean that God gives parents the right to become angry in the process. Spanking should be done in love in order to restore. Ephesians 6:4 echoes this principle, “Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord.”

B. SPANKING WITH PHYSICAL VIOLENCE

When Proverbs speaks of violence it is the Hebrew word betsa, meaning “unjust or dishonest gain, illicit gain, plunder.” The rod is specifically for the particular purpose of correction and discipline; meaning that Scripture does not grant parents the uncontrolled use of physical force. Such license is found nowhere in the scriptural concept. Parents who bully their children will crush their children’s spirit and lose their loyalty—grossly failing to achieve the biblical purpose of corporal punishment. The following Proverbs underscore the negative fruits of violent behavior, be it a parent who disciplines abusively or any other violent activity:

1:19 So are the ways of everyone who gains by violence; it takes away the life of its possessors.

3:31 Do not envy a man of violence and do not choose any of his ways.

16:29 A man of violence entices his neighbor and leads him in a way that is not good.

The root word for entice can also be translated “persuade or lure.” A man of violence persuades his child to follow in his own violent patterns.

Many of today’s prison inmates suffered at the hands of violent, abusive parents or guardians. Perhaps this motivates anti-spanking legislation. Wisdom suggests, however, that society will grow far worse if spanking is banned. If spanking is outlawed in the home today, the police force will have to absorb that affect tomorrow. Familial discipline is much more effective than state discipline. For the government to prohibit families from performing their God-ordained responsibilities (in the area of parental discipline) is to incur a workload without infrastructure. The prison overcrowding crisis of today is nothing compared to what will be, if parents are prohibited from properly correcting the errant behavior of their children. A careful, wise lawmaker allows the family to discipline citizens at a young age rather than taking on the family’s assignment.

3. SPANKING WITH FRUSTRATION

Spanking is not the venue for venting one’s frustrations.

4:17 For they eat the bread of wickedness and drink the wine of violence.

In the Legislators’ Bible Study several weeks ago we learned that “strong drink is a brawler” (20:1). Alcoholism and violence usually go hand in hand. The abuse of alcohol and the abuse of children are kindred folk. Again, the rod requires careful, timely, measured and controlled use—all opposites to intoxication.

21:7 The violence of the wicked will drag them away, because they refuse to act with justice.

Spanking for reasons other than a child’s rebellion will have a highly injurious and destructive effect. Keep in mind that if a child is spanked unjustly—out of the parent’s frustration rather than as a result of his or her sin—it will cause further separation, versus rescuing, bonding, and restoration.

4. SPANKING WITH RETRIBUTION

13:2 From the fruit of a man’s mouth he enjoys good, but the desire of the treacherous is violence.

Treachery carries the idea of an insecure footing, the idea of a lack of trust. Whether on the part of the parent or the child, biblical corporal punishment does not carry the idea of getting even. An overly authoritarian parent who attempts to extract a “pound of flesh” will not endear a child’s heart. A vengeful spirit in spanking will only drive children further away, fostering a spirit of distrust, suspicion, and provocation.

(To be concluded tomorrow)

Understanding Church Discipline

Tue, 03 Apr 2007 15:25:02 GMT

Yesterday I wrote about our church passing a test. As a pastor I felt like a parent whose son hits a winning homerun or whose daughter wins a scholarship to a prestigious university. Or even more, like a parent whose child says “no” to drugs and gangs and lives a holy life in the midst of their own generation.

A decision like our church made is agony and did not take place over ideas but over unholy behavior. Struggles like this are seldom simple and build over a long period of time. God’s Word is clear about how to proceed (Matthew 18, Romans 16, I Timothy 6) but we are so afraid to obey Him.

In the end, we had to apply Amos 3:3, “Can two walk together except they be agreed?” Even in our personal lives, all of us practice this. Sometimes there are people who are so unhappy that they want to bring us along for company, so we have to choose a separate course. This isn’t from hate but rather, a desire for peace.

Responding to Christians Who Object to Spanking

Tue, 03 Apr 2007 05:50:12 GMT

(By Bob Achilles)

* Bob is an alumnus of The Master’s Seminary. After serving as a pastor for many years, Bob now teaches theology at The Cornerstone Seminary in Vallejo, California.

Intro: In this article, Bob reviews the book Heartfelt Discipline by Clay Clarkson (Waterbrook Press, 2003). Clarkson is well-known in Christian parenting circles, and is perhaps the most popular evangelical author to oppose spanking. This review is a helpful response, not only to Clarkson, but to anyone who would argue against spanking on seemingly biblical grounds.

*****

This book (Heartfelt Discipline) is about disciplining and raising children in a godly way, and there is much in this book to praise. Since there are many disciplinary and relational abuses that are foisted upon children stemming from an immature or incomplete study of Scripture, the author seems to be responding to the need for a corrective—and indeed, a true understanding of Scripture on the subject of raising children is definitely needed.

However, the author fails to bring this needed corrective, because his biblical exegesis is faulty and misleading. The result is that he has drawn some seriously wrong conclusions. To the extent that he encourages parents to set a godly example for their children while building strong relationships with them he is correct, and the portions of his book that offer suggestions for alternate forms of discipline (i.e., alternatives to spanking) are very helpful.

But his strong and frequently asserted premise that Scripture does not advocate corporal punishment when necessary casts a shadow over the good things in his book. Whenever someone is either careless or intentionally deceptive in his use of Scripture to support his position, the red flags go up. Case in point: the author has concluded that corporal punishment is not appropriate for children. From this conclusion he appears to have sought to justify his ideas by finding ways to interpret Scripture to support his views.

It’s not possible in this short review to cover every issue he raises. Since he bases much of his argumentation on his own view of Proverbs 22:6, correcting his misinterpretation here will tend to correct many of his other misinterpretations as well. Central to his thesis is the Hebrew word naar, translated “child” in the Proverb (and also in Proverbs 20:11; 22:15; 23:13, 24; 29:15 and 21). The author claims that this word refers only to “young men” and therefore rules out physical discipline of young children.

Further, where the “rod” is used in Prov. 22:15; 23:13; and 29:15 he claims that the use of a “rod” in biblical times was for disciplining slaves and/or older children. Since the Old Testament Law called for the death of rebellious young men (Dt. 21:18-21), the age of severe discipline belongs to the Old Testament era. Therefore, using the rod on slaves or rebellious young men is inconsistent with the New Testament teaching about forgiveness, grace and the character of God.

The author reasons that if young children were not to be disciplined physically (according to his understanding of naar), and older children were not to be disciplined physically due to the cultural and Old Testament applications which no longer apply, then the Bible cannot be said to teach corporal punishment of any children.

So, what’s wrong with his reasoning?

First, the word naar, translated “child” in all the above Proverbs, is much broader than the author allows. It occurs over 200 times in the Old Testament and is used to refer to every age of a young person from within the womb to marriageable adulthood. In Exodus 2:6, it refers to the infant Moses; in 2 Samuel 12:16 it refers to Bathsheba’s baby; and in 2 Samuel 14:21 it refers to Absalom. In Judges 13:5, 7, 8, and 12 naar refers to a child not yet born; in 1 Samuel 1:22 it refers to a child not yet weaned; in Isaiah 7:16 and 8:4 it refers to a child not yet having reached the age of accountability; and in other places the word refers to Ishmael, Isaac, Joseph, and Benjamin, to name a few more of the older ones. These are just a few of the many uses that encompass all of childhood. For the author to insist that the word only refers to “young men” in Proverbs is certainly a case of reading into Scripture what fits a certain philosophy.

As to the argument that the rod only was to be applied to young men and only in the Old Testament times, see Hebrews 12:1-11, especially verses 5, 6, 7,and 10. The author alludes to this passage but only briefly and without any attempt to deal with the text. The passage deals with God’s discipline of His children and uses, with approval, an earthly father’s discipline of his children as an illustration of love in action. The passage employs strong words and teaches that discipline can sometimes be very harsh and painful, whether from God or from an earthly father.

The Greek words (used in Hebrews 12) are very instructive. Three are used to refer to children and discipline: paideia, a noun variously translated as chastisement or discipline; paideuo, the verb form meaning to train up a child, educate, chasten or instruct; and paidion, a noun referring to a childling, an infant or a half-grown boy or girl. Judging from these words, young children are clearly in view, not just young men. While the passage in Hebrews does not mandate corporal punishment, it does strongly teach that whatever is necessary to change or correct bad or unrighteous behavior is not only permitted but sometimes necessary. The author (Clarkson) is right in his desire to reach the child’s heart, but the Bible seems to be saying that sometimes the way to a child’s heart is through the seat of his pants.

Further, the author’s claim that the “rod” passages are tied to Old Testament concepts and therefore cannot be used to justify physical discipline today opens another whole can of worms. Such a claim, if tied to the rest of Proverbs, would virtually eliminate any value to the book for today—a conclusion contradicted by the New Testament quotes taken from Proverbs (like the one mentioned above in Heb. 12:5 and 6, for example).

Therefore, we must conclude that the principles given in the book of Proverbs are intended for all ages and generations, not just for the Old Testament times—including the principle of the necessary discipline of children when needed, even to the point of spanking if necessary to bring about proper behavior. In other words, the disciplinary principle being taught by the rod passages which concern children (13:24; 22:15; 23:13-14; and 29:15) is just as applicable today as the other parts of Proverbs.

Another word that is presented in a misleading way is parakaleo, a Greek word meaning to comfort, encourage, and exhort. The author tries to eliminate making the child feel guilty about anything, so he emphasizes the truth that parents need only to comfort and encourage their children. But paralakeo also means to exhort. The Holy Spirit is the paraklete, the comforter and encourager and also the exhorter—which means He not only comforts but He brings conviction and guilt as well (see John 16:7-11). If, as the author suggests, we take the Holy Spirit as our model, then we must take the full sense of the word, not just the part of the meaning that fits the author’s thesis. Encouragement is very important. But sometimes guilt is important also, when the child needs to learn about repentance, confession, and forgiveness.

The misapplication of one other word needs attention: the Hebrew word chanak, translated “train up” in Proverbs 22:6. The author is partly correct in his description of the word’s roots, but he misses the idea that the common element in all of its uses is that of setting something apart for specific use. The concept of dedication (which Clarkson emphasizes) is present but does not exhaust the meaning of the word. The original term meant “to touch the palate” of an infant as a nurse might do with pre-chewed food in order to train the child to desire and accept solid food. This involves changing the child in some way so that he not only desires solid food but becomes capable of receiving it. The child must be trained, not just dedicated, to that task.

The central idea of the word chanak as it is used in Proverbs 22:6, then, refers to actually training children, not simply guiding them. Whatever is necessary to shape the behavior of the child is to be used, including corporal punishment when necessary and when wisely applied. The author misses this point by suggesting that chanak in the Proverb refers mainly to giving guidance, not to specifically and particularly training the child in order to shape his behavior. The first part of Proverbs 22:6 is correctly translated in the Bible (NAS) as, “Train up a child in the way he should go.” But, the author’s own paraphrase of Proverbs 22:6 reveals his philosophy, to wit: “Dedicate a young man to following God’s way of wisdom” (p. 50—note also his substitution of “young man” in place of the more accurate “child”). This is not the meaning of the verse. The author’s desire to get rid of corporal punishment has clouded his objectivety.

When read with caution and in view of the author’s propensity for misusing the Scriptures, the book has much to offer. Especially helpful is the section entitled “Discipline that Works on a Child’s Won’t” (pp. 178-180 [except for the last paragraph]). I have not addressed all of the problem areas, but perhaps enough has been said to cause the reader to be discerning as he reads.

It is the conclusion of this reviewer that the Bible does indeed teach that corporal punishment is not only permitted, it is sometimes necessary—especially during the highly formative younger years of a child. The biblical text, when objectively studied, is clear.

Note: Resources used in defining the Hebrew terms in this review are A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament (Brown, Driver, Briggs) and, Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (Harris, Archer, Waltke).

Church Discipline, Can We Do That?

Mon, 02 Apr 2007 20:40:06 GMT

Our church passed a test yesterday. With an A+ I might add. We have had an on-going struggle in our body over the last several months. Ever since last fall when I began sounding the alarm regarding Emergent thought and practice in my dear old SBC, we have observed increased opposition in the church. It came to a head last week in a very difficult meeting between one couple,our deacons and myself. Following Matthew 18, it was time to bring the matter before our church. I praise God for a timely article from Crosswalk. I was able to give copies to several members before the meeting.

I spent a long time at the beginning of the meeting citing various Bible passages about why we were doing this. When the time came for discussion, there was absolute silence. God’s Word is irrefutable.

In the end, with no repentance from the offending parties, our church voted to remove them from membership. Several members later told me that it was the first time that they had ever participated in church discipline. I am certain our church will be blessed for obeying their Lord.

Who Decides How We Discipline?

Fri, 26 Jan 2007 23:45:22 GMT

A proposed ban on spanking in California raises serious questions for today's show.